I'm not trying to convince anyone to join me in my dislike of the 2012 Panda but I was sitting outside a bar in Spoleto watching a real, rear-engined Nuova 500 go by when a thought occurred to me - Fiat does have a history of following up on a really great little car with something less appealing. The Nuova 500 was followed by the almost-the-same-underneath and technically/theoretically updated but nothing like as satisfactory or charming 126 (which I could also see from the bar); the front-engined 500 was followed by the almost-etc 600 - both of which I could see; the original Panda - also in view - broke the sequence to some extent though I'm not sure the coil-sprung later models - likewise - were sufficiently different to qualify. Now the outgoing Panda - dozens all round - has an almost-the-same-etc follow-on and I just wonder if history's repeating itself.

It's all a matter of opinion, in mine the 126 is much nicer car to look at than the Nuova 500, but being born in the '80's I was born into a world of boxy square edged cars. When you say front engined 500 and 600, I presume you mean the Cinq and Sei? To an extent I have to agree with you there, even though I own one I will admit that the Cinq is the superior car. Every model will develop a cult following, whether it's successful or not, just because you and probably many other out there don't like the 2012 Panda, I'll bet there are just as many if not more people out there who do like it.

If you liked the 'old' Panda so much, buy one and stop complaining about how they've ruined the new one

Eklipze3k said:

It's all a matter of opinion, in mine the 126 is much nicer car to look at than the Nuova 500, but being born in the '80's I was born into a world of boxy square edged cars. When you say front engined 500 and 600, I presume you mean the Cinq and Sei? To an extent I have to agree with you there, even though I own one I will admit that the Cinq is the superior car. Every model will develop a cult following, whether it's successful or not, just because you and probably many other out there don't like the 2012 Panda, I'll bet there are just as many if not more people out there who do like it.

If you liked the 'old' Panda so much, buy one and stop complaining about how they've ruined the new one

Click to expand...

I have a 100HP bought new, now with 35000 miles on it; my wife has a 61-reg 1.2 that replaced a 58-reg MJ written off on the ice in December 2010 - so I've bought three.

The Panda is Fiat's most important car. If they had got it wrong they'd have been in trouble.

In a world of new Hyundais and Kias, not to mention the Up and its siblings, Fiat needed an improved Panda badly. The new one manages to offer the necessary greater width and luggage capacity, as well as improving measurably on strength, comfort, handling and performance. That it has gone, arguably, to the top of the pile again is testement to Fiat's policy of building improved engineering on top of a modified classic Giugiaro design.

The third side window, steel tailgate and fully-clothed interior cost money, and the new Panda feels like a quality product.

I like the softened edges because I like my cars curvacious, and although I respected the original boxy three door Panda I never loved it. I think I feel a bit the same about the elegant but rather cardboard-cut-out Up.

Fiat has found a design language to unite its products, which it has been aiming at. That it looks like being able to do this without going down the Russian doll path of VW should be applauded.

Sometimes replacement cars are not as attractive as their originals, but I don't think this is the case in the new Panda, and nor was it of the refreshed Croma which replaced Giugiaro's original. This was a definite improvement on a rather dull car - I mean the recent Cromas by the way. The fact that the engineering wasn't up to the concept was not the fault of the stylists who made a plain car quite striking.

My only real complaint about the new Panda is in the form of its Diesel engine, which is both less powerful, less economical and higher in emissons than the revised Diesel in the new Punto. Very odd that. The Punto comes in with 85p and below 100g/km emssions. The Panda gets less power and higher emissions....I wonder why, old engines to use up?

500 and 500L? not quite the same thing but similar!

I think the new Panda design will grow on everyone and as new colours/options/models become available then it will mature. The fact its at the top of the heap can only be a good thing.
The weight gain seems the only downside, if it has put on that much weight. Maybe there are weighing it differently.

The diesel engine question is easy, there will be 2 reasons:
1. the punto needs all the help it can get so get the more developed engine.
2. the twinair is being pushed as the clean engine in the Panda. Fiat or atleast someone inside wants to make the twin succeed.

not to mention the fact with DPF Fiat wont be pushing the diesel as quite so city friendly so not to encourage extra warranty claims.

Also the panda is at the start of its product cycle so prices are high and specs are low so there is room to move later on. Why offer the best spec or add cost at the start?

ivantate said:

500 and 500L? not quite the same thing but similar!

I think the new Panda design will grow on everyone and as new colours/options/models become available then it will mature. The fact its at the top of the heap can only be a good thing.
The weight gain seems the only downside, if it has put on that much weight. Maybe there are weighing it differently.

The diesel engine question is easy, there will be 2 reasons:
1. the punto needs all the help it can get so get the more developed engine.
2. the twinair is being pushed as the clean engine in the Panda. Fiat or atleast someone inside wants to make the twin succeed.

not to mention the fact with DPF Fiat wont be pushing the diesel as quite so city friendly so not to encourage extra warranty claims.

Also the panda is at the start of its product cycle so prices are high and specs are low so there is room to move later on. Why offer the best spec or add cost at the start?

Click to expand...

Yes - I think they're all valid points; think I've written in other threads as well that I hope the more chunky character of a 4x4 will suit the new shape better , and I hope that any hotter version will have a less fussy front end.

Have you taken the "New" Panda for a test drive yet babbo_umbro ..? If so how does it compare to the old model.?

Thunderbug said:

Have you taken the "New" Panda for a test drive yet babbo_umbro ..? If so how does it compare to the old model.?

Click to expand...

No - I realise that the proof of the pudding etc - we've been in Italy for the past month till the end of June - it would be at least as easy to try a new Panda here - they're appearing on the road in significant numbers - it may have to wait till we're back in Devon when the unfamiliarity of left-hand drive wouldn't be a factor.

I've just had the new Panda as a courtesy car and had used the previous model for 10 days as a courtesy car. I do think the new one has lost some of the fun and charm of the older model but it is still a Panda, it still has a sense of enjoyment about it and deserves to do well. The one I've driven was the base model and I did think the interior did look a bit cheap. However, that said it is not an expensive car.

Ulpian above refers to the latest Panda having a steel tail-gate. So, that might part explain the big increase in overall weight...didnt realise the older Panda model didnt have a steel tail-gate. So, what was it made of?? All tailgates are heavy items.

Obviously to get better star-rating in the NCAP crash tests the latest model has put on more metalwork and an increase in weight was inevitable.

french bean said:

I've just had the new Panda as a courtesy car and had used the previous model for 10 days as a courtesy car. I do think the new one has lost some of the fun and charm of the older model but it is still a Panda, it still has a sense of enjoyment about it and deserves to do well. The one I've driven was the base model and I did think the interior did look a bit cheap. However, that said it is not an expensive car.

Click to expand...

Interesting point. I have to say that, so far compared to our 500, the new Panda is equally as fun to throw around corners and get up to 30mph as our 500. But I've never driven a Mk2 Panda so I will take your word for it!

Not surprised you thought the Pop looked cheap though. Personally I like the interior plastics, but when you look at the spec available, it's pretty dreadful for a £9k car. The radio on our Easy model doesn't seem quite as sharp as the standard one in our base 500 Pop (although I think I need to have a fiddle around with the equaliser), and apparently the Panda Pop has an even worse stereo with only 4 speakers.

Where the 500 Pop did so well in attracting customers, I really can't see the new Panda Pop selling in any sort of volume (not at current prices anyway).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ulpian above refers to the latest Panda having a steel tail-gate. So, that might part explain the big increase in overall weight...didnt realise the older Panda model didnt have a steel tail-gate. So, what was it made of?? All tailgates are heavy items.

Obviously to get better star-rating in the NCAP crash tests the latest model has put on more metalwork and an increase in weight was inevitable

Click to expand...

.

The old model Panda did have a steel tailgate, but the Toyoya Aygo and its clones, and also the VW Up don't. Just a glass tailgate. Somebody here mentioned that if you slam an all-glass tailgate on something it can shatter! This is a point worth noting and one I had overlooked. A one piece tailgate is cheaper to make than one in steel and glass, and this, as with the pop-out rear side windows in the five door, is an area where VW saved money - sensibly really.

The new Panda is probably heavier than the old one because it is larger in every dimension, not because it is safer, which it is of course.

It fails to get the 5* NCAP rating because it doesn't have the full tally of braking aids as standard across the range, and I believe there is something inconsistent about the airbags too - I can't remember but I think I read that with the collapsing front seat back the side bags are deleted: don't quote me!

The body itself is very strong.

Having taken off the plastic nose-cone area, and got the car on the ramp, to have a peek at the skeleton, the Africa Project Car (see Cape Town thread) is certainly well made and strong, as you say. Its also a LOT heavier than the press release figures were suggesting than the previous model. The small print on the tech spec page of the Fiat website reveals all, its a substantial weight increase. That said, while the driving experience is different entirely, the Twin Air I first drove as a demonstrator, and having now put in just over 1,000 miles on the Project Car, it certainly scampers along well enough, the acceleration in the lower gears for the cut and thrust of town-driving is particularly impressive. When the Twin-Air turbo is spooled up tho, the economy tumbles alarmingly. We have been treating it gently, (running in on ordinary mineral oil to help the bedding in process), and yet to see more than 42 mpg.

Thanks for the update. I would love to know what I could get from it. This matters to me because I don't envisage changing it for a while. Peak oil and all that will make motoring very problematical very soon

I have never known a car with more variable fuel consumption figures.